I can't comment on the merger but I like this article from CNET & Gartner.  The article points out that the EU decision may have more to do with European tech industry protectionism than database competition.

I also like the ad Oracle is running.

Prior to visiting India, I happened to "StumbleUpon" Bill Gate's speech at TED regarding Malaria. In the speech, he lays out the economic challenge of solving health problems such as Malaria. The problem with a disease like Malaria is that it has been eradicated from rich countries - but not in poor countries. It's a problem because the economies that still have the disease don't provide sufficient economic incentive for the pharmaceutical companies to invest in a cure.

When I was in India, I "stumbled upon" a potentially innovative solution to this problem. India has a problem with Tuberculosis. Unlike Malaria, TB needs medicine not just bed nets, as is the case with Malaria. But the cost of TB drug development is high and the economic return low.

A solution? Apply open source techniques and technologies that are used in open source software development to the drug discovery process. The "Open Source Drug Discovery" initiative was launched and funded by the Indian government to the tune of $35 Million. Sun is a sponsor of this initiative and I'm proud to see our employees engaged in work that not only improves the lives of people through the use of technology, but helps expand the lifespan of people as well.

Check out www.osdd.net. Join. Figure out how open source approaches can solve other big problems facing us.

One of the great things about my job is that I occasionally get to meet with heads of state or other government officials. As a leading R&D investing company in an industry that creates a lot of jobs around the world, Sun has a lot to offer. Consider our open source strategy. You can access our software assets anywhere in the world and create a business using that technology or supporting local companies and organizations that use it as well.

My experience so far has been that this message has been best received by government leaders outside the U.S. For example, I was fortunate to meet the Prime Minister of Macedonia a few months ago named Nikola Gruevski. He’s a young leader selling the geographic and infrastructure advantages of his country for companies looking to emerging economies in Eastern Europe and Asia.

Today was the first time I was asked to meet with the head of a U.S. state, Massachusetts, Deval Patrick. Typically I’ve found that head of U.S. States can be rather presumptive about a company’s interest in their state. Especially a state like Massachusetts, who has their own incredible intellectual and academic assets to offer to a company like Sun.

So, it was refreshing that the governor requested the meeting with our CEO, Jonathan Schwartz. Sun employs a number in the state. We are a major supplier of technology to the universities in the state. A number of the state’s alumni work in high positions throughout Sun regardless of whether they live in the state or not. At the heart of economics lies innovation - and innovation is Sun's specialty....and apparently Massachusetts as well.

During my recent trip, I was intrigued to find out that the Minnesota State Colleges and Universities System (MNSCU) combines its 32 institutions, including 25 two-year colleges and seven state universities to be the largest single provider of higher education in the state of Minnesota. This is very impressive as the colleges and universities operate 54 campuses in 47 Minnesota communities and serve about 250,000 students in credit-based courses. Overall, the system produces about 34,000 graduates each year.

MNSCU in effect brings all the higher education in the state under a single organizational structure. Technically though, each organization is separate. University of Minnesota, for example, likes to say they pre-exist the state. But I don't think this level of coordination happens elsewhere in Unites States. I know in my home state of California there are three distinct organizations:  The University of California, California State University system, and the community college system.

But even the community college system is not really a system, but a collection of independent colleges. In effect, they're all synchronized by a master plan that gets updated every decade or so. I think California and other states would be well served to adopt a MNSCU model because this model strives to meet the personal and career goals of a wide range of individual learners. At the same time, they go a step further with an “Accountability Dashboard”, job opportunities and networking, as well as publications and more to help provide value to students and faculty that are part of this extended network.

I've now lived through 2 different economic bubbles (and bubble bursts) as well as the election of 5 different presidents (where I could vote).  These experiences have led me to conclude that the 6 most dangerous words in the English language are:
"This time it will be different"

I love this web posting  from "The Daily Kos" that explains this chart for two reasons:  It helps provide historical context to what is going on in the stock market today.  Its an old adage, but of course the only way to keep from repeating the mistakes of the past is to study history.  This chart give great historical context.  The other reason I like it is because a picture is worth a thousand words and I appreciate creative representation of data to communicate information of value.  The picture itself isn't that unique but what it conveys is.

On the drive home yesterday I heard an NPR story from a Princeton economist who made the point that healthcare as an industry is probably one of the best to use as a economic stimulus engine.  The interview can be heard here. I think he raises a good point that, unlike many industries, the full economic benefit of healthcare as an industry stays in country.  By comparison, if you invest in the manufacturing sector through individual tax rebate checks, then some percentage of that stimulus goes off shore since manufacturing is done all over the world.  He argues that this is the wrong time to reform U.S. healthcare because that would reduce the GDP.

I buy his argument that healthcare is a unique industry to consider as an engine for economic stimulus.

I disagree that we shouldn't reform it or, at the very least, part of it.  If for no other reason than the economic inefficiency of the U.S. system where we don't have effective health information exchanges.   How many times do you have to provide the same information to healthcare providers that they then re-key into their system?  How many times are duplicative tests done as you move from one doctor or specialist to another?  How unreliable are we as patients in reporting our medical history, much less our current prescriptions that we may be taking?

If for no other reason than providing the economic resources to expand the delivery of healthcare services to those who do not have coverage today, economic stimulus through more efficient and effective healthcare information 'Systems' is a national imperative.  Systems here is capitalized on purpose - meaning the linkage of all aspects of healthcare delivery into a single patient view that is confidential and comprehensive.  The technology is there, we're providing it in Canada as part of the Provincial Laboratory Information Solution (PLIS) and the interoperable Electronic Health Record (iEHR) system. Not to mention the National Health Service in the United Kingdom where we help link more than 40 million health records for national interoperability.

All that has been missing in the U.S. is the willpower to do it.  Perhaps this will change with the new administration who based on this article may be considering this very strategey

I traveled to Brazil and Argentina last month.  One thing I look for when I travel internationally are models that can be expanded elsewhere. It's the “honeybee effect” of pollinating ideas around the world. The State of São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP) is one of these ideas.

FAPESP is the research foundation of the State government of São Paulo. It was created in 1962 and its purpose is to support scientific and technological research in the State. Its similar to the US National Science Foundation except its regional not national. When it created FAPESP, the São Paulo government’s aim was to “endow the State of São Paulo with an agency for supporting research that would be independent, efficient and agile in its decision-making”.  I don't know if they've documented the financial impact of FAPESP, but I suspect its existence is one reason why the São Paulo region has become so economically vibrant.

What impressed me is the foresight that the politicians had in creating and funding the organization. As I understand it, FAPESP receives a fixed percentage of the State budget every year for R&D. They invest based on peer-reviewed scientific merit rather than political influence. They even have an endowment to keep funding constant during economic downturns. Finally, they have a low overhead operation that results in a high percentage of dollars going to research rather than administration.

These four characteristics - fixed funding percentage, endowment, scientific merit and low overhead - should be key design points for similar endeavors. Research drives innovation, innovation drives economic vitality. Every government would be wise to create a FAPESP in their community -- letting ideas and research grow naturally and giving the government the opportunity to harvest the rewards.

Maybe you saw the story about American Express being granted authority to become a bank.  This enables them to get aid from the big bank bailout.  The question I have is, how can I become a bank?  After all, the reduction in value of my 401K prevents me from taking or making loans.....

When I was in Buenos Aires, I learned that the government, facing declining tax revenues from falling commodity prices, decided to nationalize the pension system. As best as I could tell it would be similar to the United States government taking the money in 401Ks and IRAs and putting it in the Social Security system. Since we know the Social Security Income isn't really separate and is used by the government for general spending, we can only imagine what would happen in the U.S. if the government attempted to do the same thing.

In Argentina, they protest
So, as I finished my last meeting of the day on 10/23/08, a large protest was underway out the President's home (it's their White House, only it's painted pink).  I went into the crowd to take some pictures. You can't really see the poster but it reads "Ayer fue la soja, Hoy los aporter jubilatorios, Mañana a quien le toca" or "Yesterday it was the soybean. Today, retirement contributions. Tomorrow, what will they take?" (The soybean reference had to do with a proposal to increase taxation on Soybeans as the price of the commodity declined.)

Bill Joy wrote a controversial cover article for Wired magazine back in 2000 called "Why the Future Doesn't Need Us."  Although he was writing about the dangers posed by the technologies of genetics, nanotechnology and robotics, I can't help but think it also applies to the "technology" that spawned the current financial crisis.  Technologies that created these financial instruments that replicated themselves so thoroughly throughout the global economic system that no one realized the extent of its replication.  Bill writes:

"The 21st-century technologies - genetics, nanotechnology, and robotics (GNR) - are so powerful that they can spawn whole new classes of accidents and abuses. Most dangerously, for the first time, these accidents and abuses are widely within the reach of individuals or small groups. They will not require large facilities or rare raw materials. Knowledge alone will enable the use of them."

By the way, I watched Bush's speech tonight and I think he supported my blog entry from a few days ago about AIG becoming too big to fail.  He said:

"Once this crisis is resolved, there will be time to update our financial regulatory structures. Our 21st-century global economy remains regulated largely by outdated 20th-century laws.  Recently, we've seen how one company can grow so large that its failure jeopardizes the entire financial system."

The inference being we can't allow that to happen again.  This may be the first time I agree with Bush.

I heard on NPR today a ridiculously apologetic comment that the people who developed these mortgage backed securities were the "rocket scientists" of Wall Street.  And that the executives of these financial firms probably didn't understand the securities that the "rocket scientists" created.  If this is the case and if we are bailing out the rocket scientists and their managers who didn't understand, then I propose the following regulation in exchange for our potential trillion dollar bailout:  If you can't explain the security on a postcard that my mother could understand then its too complex and should not be allowed.  Heck, lets apply the same rule to our mortgage loan documents -- 1 page, thats it.  If its longer than that its too complicated.

If a company, like AIG is too big to fail and the government is then required to bail it out, shouldn't the government either prevent companies from getting that big in the first place or require a bigness tax to go into an insurance account that could be used in the event of failure?   Kinda like how earthquake insurance works in CA.  I know this sounds like anti-capitalist heresy but I'm not sure I agree with this too big to fail excuse.

I heard on the radio that more value was lost in the dot com bust than in the mortgage mess yet there was not a government bailout then.  If those are the facts, it underscores that bigness is not necessarily a good thing.

I previously blogged about a speech I heard from the Chinese Vice Chairman last June.  I didn't mention in that post that he talked about the pace of change in China to a capitalist economy.  He said there are those in China who want things to go faster and there are those who are worried about the pace of change being too fast.  He said that there are those that said 'be careful of those on Wall Street and their ways.  We don't necessarily understand what they do and they may trick us.'  It sounds like the more we learn about this mortgage securitzation meltdown, the "go slowers" may have been right.

I'm in Washington D.C. this week to attend a conference. My hosts invited me to attend a dinner with Chinese Vice Premier Wang Qishan's delegation. For some reason, I was expecting an intimate gathering, but I realized quickly that it was one of those rubber-chicken dinners with hundreds of guests—none of whom I knew.   But once the doors to the main dining room opened, I realized that this wasn't going to be a typical event. Each table bore the name of a large U.S. corporation, such as AIG, Chevron, Citi and Dell. Even Amway was a “Gold Sponsor." At the front of the room, there was a large rectangular dining table that spanned the entire width of the room. It had seats all around it, meaning that half of the table would have its back to the rest of room. For those of us in the audience, it gave the sense that we were going to be watching a state dinner. Which in a way, we were.